He was not found innocent the court case was about the twitter account not the claims made on it.
If he can show loss of income or damages to future employment he can charge her for defamation this can lead to a hefty $ amount and jail time.
Due to previous case history on the books companies can be held viable for actors/voice actors being an influence over minors and using that for predatory gains if they have had previous reports of suspicion hence why he was removed
Mob Mentality and people jumping to conclusions get mainstreamed and insane amounts of injustice happen. Lots of damage happens to people and all of this damage is never repaired.
Blizzard hasn’t apologized or released any statements on this.
Blizzard locks threads based on “political disagreements” in reality these damaging actions are political, the reasons for these actions are political and the reason it never gets fixed is political.
People are STILL unchanged on this thought and believe they’ve never been wrong about this and still push as though this guy was 100% guilty.
And Blizzard does not have to. California is a “Right to work state”. Blizzard can terminate anyone for any reason they want.
“You did not smile when you came in today, You’re fired!”, in California that is 100% legal and ok.
The voice acting is also Blizzard proprietary property and they are free to do with it whatever they want, when they want.
That’s true, they can enact injustice and purge and block and censor and fire anyone they want. It’s a call to ethics, a call they can take or simply hang up on.
And legally, their corporate counsel is telling them to stay away from this and not go near it with a 1000 foot pole. Any good corporate counsel would tell a board the same thing. Don’t apologize, don’t comment. Just leave it alone.
Sorry to break it to you bud, but that is a 100% American tactic. We (America) perfected the corporate legal position of never admitting guilt and never publicly apologize until you are court order to do so.
Activision/Blizzard is a publicly traded company and in this scenario, the Corporate Counsel wins. Political or not. The board is going to side with counsel.
Many times the optics will influence decisions. For example, the entire concept and decision to replace the VA in the first place was based off optics and political decisions. For the same reasons there could be a turn around. There’s nothing absolute at this point other than what Blizzard hasn’t done yet as of this date and time.
No, the protective order was a civil stalking protective order, which does not normally come with gag order provisions unless you can make a prima facie showing you’d be very likely to prevail in a defamation suit. Put plainly, if evidence supports the idea that the stalker is spreading lies and malicious rumors, you can get them muzzled. That’s why the Twitter accounts and at least one set of Google Docs were pulled.
You don’t have to show these kinds of damages to go for defamation as punitive and nominal are always available. Further, getting a hefty judgment doesn’t mean jack or squat against someone who can’t pay it, which is why most tort actions don’t turn into anything when it is just between two individuals rather than individual vs company. The judgment can ruin her credit score, but that’s about all you can guarantee.
Finally, you aren’t going to jail for defamation. We don’t have debtor prisons and what you owe in civil cases is specific performance and/or money damages, not loss of freedom.
The voice actor sought a civil stalker protective order under Ohio state law, and won. The docket is under seal unless you physically go to the court house and present appropriate credentials to view the case because per law you can’t publish these things on the internet.
Unless Mr. Flynn posts the exact details of his order, we won’t know exactly every iota of information found at that hearing, but given the successful gagging of social media and the fact that nothing he said in his statement is contrary to a typical protective hearing, it is what he says it is.
And yes… individual testimony IS a source and a valid form of evidence. Cases regularly hinge entirely upon personal testimony alone.